stephan tanner > integrated design

“Unnecessary Insulation”

Please read the Eco-Structure Magazine, January/February Issue, page 14 ‘Correspondence’

The argument made in the letter is a common response to building projects we support. INTEP, the name of our company founded more than 35 years ago, is based on our "integrated planning" and design methodologies, not the traditional "value engineering" philosophy reflected in the letter. Our process of integrated planning focuses on holistically optimizing buildings on three levels: 1) Investment; 2) Life Cycle, and; 3) Sustainability Cost. Let me briefly explain by using Investment and Sustainability Cost as examples ...

First, Investment: The BioHaus, see the "Total Immersion" article in the September issue, is based on the German Passivhaus standard. This standard is rooted in the fact that, in the European climate and construction market, a building's heating system can be eliminated with a super-insulated building envelope and other measures. After 15 years of applying this energy standard, today's results can generate an energy-use reduction of 85-90% without any additional investment costs in larger building projects. We applied this standard to the BioHaus for the first time in a commercial project in the U.S. with the same energy-reduction results! My colleagues and I refer to this phenomena as "tunneling through the cost barrier" as outlined by Paul Hawken, Amory and Hunter Lovins in his book Natural Capital.

Second example, Sustainability Cost, or the cost to tomorrow’s global society. In response to the notion of “money as a resource," the words of Sir Nicolas Stern describing the global warming crisis comes to mind: It's “the greatest market failure the world has ever seen”.

The real culprit here is that traditional "value engineering" uses only the current market cost of the resource. It ignores the future cost of the resource – which is why we have a global warming crisis. Accounting for this total Sustainability Cost, I would direct the letter's author to the spring '07 edition of the McKinsey Quarterly  (Download mckinsey_quarterly_107.pdf ), “A Cost Curve for Greenhouse Gas Reduction.” The  chart from that report shows that greenhouse gas-abatement measures beyond "business as usual" (page 38) with "building insulation" leads by a NEGATIVE cost, or a payback of 150 Euros per CO2 ton by 2030.

Let me provoke future discussion with a final comment and question: We in the U.S. emit 20 tons per capita of CO2 while the global target goal by 2050 is 1 ton per capita. Since buildings contribute 38% of CO2 emissions and have a life cycle of 50 to 100 years, are we taking real responsibility with traditional value engineering approaches?

Let's tour the BioHaus with Brightcove!

For the public television show "New Energy," Erika Johnson and her team were filming at Waldsee BioHaus last fall. With the help of my friends Troy, Elissa, Jon and another John, we cut their wonderful film footage into a tour of the BioHaus - thank you all!

May I invite you to sit back and enjoy the show on my new Brightcove channel ... it's a solution I intend to bring to more colleges and universities throughout the U.S.

(Please share the videos with your colleagues, friends and families, too. I have to admit, the Brightcove player is as cool as the BioHaus itself!)

TAGS: waldsee BioHaus, concordia Language Villages, sustainable design, Brightcove

****

Gas Mileage

The Gas Mileage of Humans

Here’s how I calculate it …

If one totals the total energy consumption in the world and divides it by the total global population, the result is about 17,500 kilowatt hours or about 2,000 watts of continuous energy use. That means that total energy consumption in the world today is as if every human being on this planet has 20 light bulbs, each a 100-watt bulb, burning all the time. That would equal the use of about 1,700 liters (450 gallons) of gasoline per human per year. Most of these 2,000 watts are fossil fuels which lead to the current global warming issues.

Of course this energy use is not equal in all nations. Developing nations use less then 500 watts per person … developed nations like Europeans use 6,000 watts per person … Americans, about 12,000 watts per person. Rapidly growing nations, especially in the Pacific Rim, are increasing their energy use from 500 watts per person a few years ago to currently more like 1,000/1,500 watts per person today. You do the math.

Which leads to the next question … What should the gas mileage of humans be?

I think about two critical issues when considering an answer to this question:
-    Maintaining my standard of living
-    Sustainability: Global Warming issues

So how much energy is needed with today’s technology to maintain our standard of living? Interestingly, the answer to this question seems to be 2,000 watts as well. Papers written about this subject have titles like: “A Two-Kilowatt Society: Plausible Future or Illusion?”

When it comes to the global warming question, it’s generally accepted that 0.2 Kelvin per decade warming is reasonable; that equals a global stabilization goal of 550 ppmv of CO2 in the atmosphere. This goal would amount to about one ton of CO2 per person or about 500 watts of fossil based continues energy use per person.

Novatlantis, calling for a “2000 Watt Society,” combines these two calculations resulting in an energy vision for the human race; living on 2000 Watt of continues energy, 1500 Watt of renewable and 500 Watt of fossil based fuels – a vision I personally very much support.

The Gas Mileage of Buildings

The primary use of energy to use (not just operate) buildings contributes to about 30% to 40% of the human consumption of energy in the developed world. With that in mind, buildings also contribute to our climate-related problems at the same level.

The gas mileage of buildings is measured in the US in Btu/square foot and year or in the metric world kWh/square meter and year or MJ/m2a. Energy codes and energy standards are tools that define the gas mileage of buildings. They’re based on professional and scientific calculation methods and are used to regulate and design buildings.

For example, when it comes to educational facilities …

-    Existing school buildings in Minnesota use between 120,000 and 170,000 Btu/sfyr
-    The Minnesota energy code for new school buildings is about 100,000 Btu/sfyr
-    A school district with a progressive goal in Minnesota will build a new school building using between 50,000 and 80,000 Btu/sfyr

-    Existing school buildings in central Europe will use between 50,000 and 100,000 Btu/sfyr
-    A central Europe energy code for new school buildings is about 50,000 Btu/sfyr
-    A school district with a progressive goal in central Europe will build a new school building using about 20,000 to 30,000 Btu/sfyr

-    A leading edge school building in central Europe uses less than 15,000 Btu/sfyr
-    A leading edge school building in Minnesota uses less then 15,000 Btu/sfyr = that is 85% less then the energy code stipulates!

So what should the gas mileage of buildings be?

If one believes in and supports the vision of a “2000 Watt Society”, then the answer to this question is a building which uses about 1/3 of 2000 watts or 660 watts of continuing energy per person – of which less then 145 watts are derived from fossil fuels.

Doing some simple math (not that the world is that simple!) the equation for Minnesota is:

Current energy code  by (2000 Watt Society ÷ U.S. human energy consumption) or in numbers 100,000 Btu/sfyr × (2,000 ÷ 12,000) = 16,700 Btu/sfyr.

This mathematical exercise would support the idea of establishing an energy standard in the USA similar to the Passivhaus Standard in Germany or the Minergie-P standard in Switzerland.

And the big question: Can a building be built today achieving this gas mileage?

This simple answer – YES!

There are thousands of buildings throughout central Europe that meet the standards above and a few on the North American continent. They are two in Illinois, one in Canada and of course in Minnesota the Waldsee Biohaus at Concordia Language Villages. And the BioHaus is located in one of the harshest cold climates in the lower 48 with over 10,000 heating degree-days.

Energy matters

Let's face it: we totally get that energy matters when we go to the pump and fill up our cars! No problem understanding the concept of gas mileage and how it impacts our pocket book. Yet when it comes to how energy matters and impacts larger issues such as our health, our culture and our planet, things get a little more difficult to understand for all of us.

While working on buildings, a personal passion of mine is to continually deepen my knowledge of how everything is interrelated when it comes to resource use, especially energy use, and to figure out innovative ways to make the most of the least!

With the hope of inspiring some new approaches, here are some questions I've been asking myself recently ...

-    What is the ‘gas mileage’ of humans?
-    How much of that ‘gas mileage’ is being used for buildings and what is the ‘gas mileage’ of buildings?
-    What should the ‘gas mileage’ of humans be?
-    What should the  ‘gas mileage’ of buildings be?
-    Can a building be built today achieving this ‘gas mileage’?

I'll be sharing some of my own answers in upcoming posts, but I'd love to hear yours, too. Send me your thoughts!

Recent Articles

The Sustainable-Design Paradigm >>

To create a greener built environment, American architects could do well to adopt the European's integrated, wholistic model of sustainable design By Stephan Tanner, AIA

MN AIA >> Page 1
MN AIA >> Page 2

TAGS:   sustainable design, AIA, integrated planning

My Philosophy: Art/Architecture

What can I say? I'm passionate about architecture and I have a drive for the perfect building – that is, how all details of architecture come together: craft, art, culture, function, detail, etc.

I also have a passion for people, especially for the differences in our cultural perspective, which I find very enriching.

So when you search for the perfect building project, you really do end up working on a lot of different and non-traditional projects!

As a Swiss-born, Swiss- and American trained architect, I've had a lot of unique influences on my work.

My dad was an auditor. My mom escaped East Germany on her fourth attempt. I started my apprenticeship as an architect at the age of 15. As I child, I traveled the world with my family, explored it with my best friend when I was 20, then traveled for some unique project opportunities to different corners of the world. I got a degree in fine arts and oh yes, architecture. Being an architect is now a lifestyle for me.

Today, I have a strong personal belief that "nature is perfect" and that good architecture can only be achieved with a true understanding of place and its people. By incorporating our thorough, scientific process of Integrated Planning, I strive to create buildings that respect and celebrate the environment, not be in conflict with it. Of course it has to function well for its users, authentically  reflect the qualities in its expression and make efficient use of resources.

The perfect building? I don't know. It's just what I do.

TAGS:  integrated planning, architecture, perfect building, sustainable design